R S R T C vs Kamal Kishore Shamra
2022 Latest Caselaw 2464 Raj/2

       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                   BENCH AT JAIPUR

              S.B. Civil Second Appeal No. 328/2009
R S R T C & Ors.
                                                    ----Appellant-Defendants
                                   Versus
Kamal Kishore Shamra
                                                      ----Respondent-Plaintiff

For Appellant(s)         :     Mr. Anuroop Singhi
                               Mr. Tarun Verma
                               Mr. Bhaskar Agarwal
For Respondent(s)        :     Mr. Babu Lal Gupta


            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL
                           Order

22/03/2022

This second appeal has been filed by appellants-defendants

assailing the judgment and decree dated 17.09.1997 passed by

Additional Civil Judge (Jr.Division) No.2, Jaipur City Jaipur in civil

suit No.1508/1988 whereby and whereunder learned trial court

held entitlement of the respondent-plaintiff to get appointment on

the post of Conductor pursuant to a letter/order dated 18.2.1987

as also for all consequential benefits including monetary benefits.

The judgment has been affirmed in the first appeal vide judgment

dated 08.09.2008 passed by Additional District Judge No.4 Jaipur

City, Jaipur in civil regular appeal No.48/2005 (490/97).

By perusal of record, it transpires that Deputy General

Manager (Law) of the RSRTC got a letter dated 18.02.1987 that as

per settlement between parties in Lok Adalat, the appointment be

offered/given to the plaintiff Kamal Kumar Sharma. On the basis

of this letter, the trial court has passed the impugned decree.

(2 of 3) [CSA-328/2009]

Having heard learned counsel for both parties, after perusal

of impugned judgments and letter on record, this court is of

considered opinion that matter requires consideration, hence

appeal is admitted for hearing on the following substantial

question of law.

"Whether the impugned judgments holding entitlement of the plaintiff to get appointment on the post of Conductor on the basis of letter dated 18.2.1987 is justified and impugned judgments are liable to be sustained?"

Heard the counsel for both parties on the stay application.

During the pendency of this appeal, no interim stay against

the execution of impugned judgment and decree was passed,

therefore, the plaintiff proceeded for execution.

In execution, the RSRTC released amount of Rs.5,70,412/-

through cheque dated 22.01.2013 to the respondent-plaintiff

subject to outcome of the appeal and accordingly the first

execution proceedings were dropped. The subsequent execution

proceeding for recoveries of the monetary benefits pursuant to the

impugned judgment is said to be pending

It has been alleged by both parties that respondent-plaintiff

was not reinstated in service pursuant to the impugned

judgments.

Having considered facts and circumstances of this case, it is

hereby ordered that during the pendency of appeal, the further

recovery proceedings against appellant pursuant to impugned

judgment and decree shall remain stayed. However, the amount of

(3 of 3) [CSA-328/2009]

Rs.5,70,412/- already released by the RSRTC to the respondent-

plaintiff shall not be recovered.

Accordingly, stay application stands disposed of.

Record has already been summoned.

(SUDESH BANSAL),J

TN/1

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)